SHREE JADISIDDESHWAR URBAN CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI LIMITED ,BELGAUM vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DEELHI
Facts
The assessee, a cooperative society, did not file an income tax return for AY 2018-19 despite significant cash transactions. The AO initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 148, denying the Section 80P deduction due to non-compliance with Section 80AC. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision without adequately addressing the assessee's submissions regarding the validity of the reassessment notice.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to consider the assessee's evidence and submissions regarding the validity of the Section 148 notice and the denial of the Section 80P deduction. Therefore, the case was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, ensuring the assessee is given an adequate opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the validity of the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 and the denial of the deduction claimed under Section 80P due to non-filing of the return under Section 139(1) and non-compliance with Section 80AC.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 148, Section 144B, Section 250, Section 143(2), Section 142(1), Section 139(1), Section 80AC, Section 80P
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” PANAJI BENCH
Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALEShri Jadisiddheshwar Urban
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” PANAJI BENCH BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I T A. No.257/PAN/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19) Shri Jadisiddheshwar Urban Vs I T O, Credit Souhard Sahakari National e Assessment . Limited, Centre, Near Vithal Mandr Bellad Delhi. Bagewadi, Talhukkeri, Belgaum-591305, Karnataka. PAN .No. AACAS2214F (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)
Assessee by Shri.Pramod Y Vaidya.AR Revenue by Smt.Rijula Uniyal. Sr.DR
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 22.01.2026 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of the NFAC Delhi/CIT(A) passed u/sec147 r.w.s144B of the and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the validity of notice u/sec148 of the Act and the CIT(A) sustaining the denial of claim of deduction u/sec80P of the Act made by the Assessing Officer.
2 ITA. No.257/PAN 2025. Shri Jadisiddheshwar Urban Credit Souhard sahakari Limited. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse is a cooperative society and is engaged in activities of providing credit facilities to its members. The income tax department based on the NMS portal found large transactions of cash deposits and with drawls done by the assesse in the F.Y.2017-18 and the assesse has not filed the return of income for the A.Y.2018-19. The Assessing officer (A.O) has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act and further notice u/sec143 (2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act are issued calling for the details and there was compliance. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has dealt on the submissions filed on 06.06.2023 & 14.02.2024 in respect of validity of issue of notice u/sec148 of the Act and filling of return of income in lieu of said notice. Further the A.O found that for the A.Y.2018-19 the assessee has not filed the return of income u/sec 139(1) of the Act and the conditions stipulated under section 80AC of the Act are not complied by the assessee and the A.O has denied the claim of deduction u/sec80P of the Act of Rs.766693/- and assessed the total income of Rs.766698/- and passed the order u/sec147 r.w.s144B of the Act dated 18.03.2024. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO but has sustained the action of the A.O and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A),
3 ITA. No.257/PAN 2025. Shri Jadisiddheshwar Urban Credit Souhard sahakari Limited. the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings. The Ld.AR mentioned that the CIT(A) has not dealt on the details and evidences filed in the appellate proceedings on the validity of notice. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue envisaged by the Ld.AR that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the denial of claim of deduction u/sec80P of the Act made by the Assessing Officer and overlooking the facts and material evidences filed on the validity of reasseement proceedings. Prima-facie, the CIT(A) has dealt on the findings of the AO and has not considered the submissions/evidences of the assesse filed in the proceedings and there is no findings on the validity of issue of notice u/sec148 of the Act. Therefore, considering the overall facts, circumstances and principles of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing and accordingly restore the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and the CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee should also cooperate in
4 ITA. No.257/PAN 2025. Shri Jadisiddheshwar Urban Credit Souhard sahakari Limited. submitting the information for early disposal of the appeal and the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22/01/2026 as per rule 34(5) of the ITAT Rules 1963. Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 22/01/2026
Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy//
BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji
5 ITA. No.257/PAN 2025. Shri Jadisiddheshwar Urban Credit Souhard sahakari Limited. Initial Date 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS
Draft proposed & placed before PS the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by PS Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the PS Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed
